Slashdot Mirror
Google Confirms Intent To Bid for 700MHz Spectrum
narramissic writes "Today Google put an end to the 'will they or won't they' debate with the announcement that the company intends to join in the bidding for 700MHz wireless spectrum in late January. 'We believe it's important to put our money where our principles are,' Eric Schmidt, Google's chairman and CEO, said in a statement. 'Consumers deserve more competition and innovation than they have in today's wireless world. No matter which bidder ultimately prevails, the real winners of this auction are American consumers who likely will see more choices than ever before in how they access the Internet.'"
...put an end to the 'will they or won't they' debate...
I never saw any sound evidence put forth that they wouldn't bid on this spectrum. As far as I was concerned this was a sure thing. Here's to hoping they win the auction!
I got a catholic block.
I'm still undecided whether Google as a whole genuinely are agents of good in the corporate world or if it's just the spin they're clever at putting on things, but if the latter is the case... then damn they're good.
Strike while the iron is hot.
Google is on fire now, and as far as the market is concerned, can do no wrong. There will not be any future time where Google will be able to put together the sort of money needed to make these types of investments.
But that doesn't mean they will succeed in their wireless plans. As cool as they are, the wireless spectrum is a well established area with not only wireless carriers already bumping against each other for more elbow room but also broadcast radio and television conglomerates. Google can't play David successfully forever. They may have done a great job on the web where they led the technology, but here they will be following and a look at their online office suite, it is clear that they are poor followers.
The key here is that they have got the wireless companies where they want them even if they don't win the auction. If the other companies knew that Google was not going to bid on it then they would just wait for it expired and be put up without the requirements. Now Google assures themselves an open network even if they don't win because the other companies have to follow the requirements.
"If you like Battlestar Galactica, you're probably a huge nerd." -Stephen Colbert
What does Google plan to do with this spectrum?
Offer residential broadband-to-700mhz VoIP routers to customers who would, in turn, become cellular access points.
Just food for thought (there's a lot standing in the way of something like this). It would be nice to have privately-licensed spectrum available to the public because then we wouldn't be limited to 100 milliwatts.
More
Yes, it is. Part of the switch over to digital involves moving TV channels using the higher numbered channels to lower numbered channels, so that this spectrum can be made available.
There's oodles of TV spectrum available in part because there's never been enough interest in terrestrial broadcasting, and also because every single TV station in the US has been allocated two channels, one for their existing analog service, and one for the digital replacement. Once the analog spectrum goes away, 50% of the TV spectrum currently in use will become available.
One interesting oddity is that digital channels have "soft" numbers from an end-user point of view rather than being tied to the frequency they're allocated. For example, CBS broadcasts on channel 12 in analog here but digitally on channel 13, but both are numbered "12" on the TV. So TV channels broadcasting on the frequencies being removed may continue to appear in the same place on your "dial" even though those actual frequencies aren't even available any more, let alone in use. (This is by design, the aim being to help make the switchover as smooth as possible.)
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
My principle is this: if you come in my house, please don't piss all over my toilet seat. I take a great deal of pride in my toilet seats; I have several crafted from pure ivory, extracted from an elephant I shot myself. Covered in exquisite carvings, the detail is impressive, and many male guests appear to become distracted, and piss all over the seat. It really makes me angry!
I also have to mention that I have used the power of Linux and Open Source Software to solve this problem, but to no avail. I have written lengthy Bash scripts, tweaked my configuration files and even recompiled my kernel but this seems to be one area where the power of Linux and Open Source Software cannot help.
I would try Windows, but it does not have the power of Linux and Open Source Software, instead it is for the sheep who piss all over my toilet walls.
I mentioned Linux, can someone mod me up, please?
This isn't really about winning contracts, this is an auction, just as it was for PCS and AWS. PCS was an unmitigated disaster precisely because the entire thing was "highest bidder wins". Swathes of spectrum were unused as they were owned by speculators, and no operators were ever able, in practice, to purchase spectrum in every market. The notion that the intent was to create usable mobile phone networks was simply not considered by the FCC, who were only interested in raising a huge amount of money, and used "free market" justifications for the ensuing chaos.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Seriously, you're going to try to reduce Google to this level?
First and foremost, they provide you with the best search results, and have done so for years, for free.
They provide an outstanding email system, with now 5GB of free space and growing, for free.
They provide one of the most amazing mapping systems ever, continually adding new, cutting edge features, for free, both on the web, on your phone and in Google Earth.
They provide office collaboration online apps in Google Docs (which I use almost every day with friends spread out across the globe), for free.
They provide a really great photo organizing software (Picasa) and even some space on their site to upload pictures to, for free.
They provide a place to share gigabytes of video with everyone on earth in Google Video and YouTube, for free.
And we're merely scratching the surface.
And you're going to try and reduce them to the level of "Madison Avenue hucksters"?
Oh, that's right, they developed a cutting edge advertising system that provides context-sensitive, extremely-low-key advertisements in an un-annoying way, and a backend system that allows any size company to competitively bid for ad placement in this system at a reasonable rate.
You're right, Google sucks, man! Fight the power!
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
The good news is that Google will make all cellphones better if they get into the race. The reason? Openness. From the beginning of time it seems the US carriers have locked down there phones so you can't do things like load MP3 songs and java applets to them without buying them online. They have the java networking locked down so you cannot connect to everything or use regular sockets (IE not web).
Right now companies like Verizon are panicking and racing to open there networks (IE http://www.phonescoop.com/news/item.php?n=2552), if google gets spectrum it will be good for all because google will have lots of cool applications and programs on there phones, and the other carriers to even compete will have to open up there phones for development to everyone.
Also the 700mhz spectrum is a great place to be for a new network as you can get better coverage and need less cell density when your starting out.
-M
Google chose to announce this on a Friday to piss off Robert Cringely, who now has to wait an entire week to write wild speculations about Google's plans.
Right, like Google is going to pay 4.7 billion just to be nice and give free access to all. I don't think so. There must be some business model behind their decision. This is Google, they may not be evil, but they are still a business, and need to make money.
Judging buy their current model (Transparency for end users, but get lots of income from companies that advertise through them) I would pose the option that what they are making is ad based. Otherwise, they would have to charge the consumers, which would be a radical change to their normal business model.
As for the power limitation, I doubt that will be raised. Several reasons include:
1) Crazy / Paranoid people who make the law think that powerful wireless signals can and will melt your brain, and must be reduced.
2) Security: If someone finds an exploit and acts as a host / connection node, if they choose to exploit it for illegitimate reasons (eg: stealing passwords, credit cards, etc.), then the less area they can cover with their signal, the better. This of course can have problems if there is a mesh model in place, which would route other connections nodes to his client. Also, you don't want your data to be transmitted further than needed.(eg: If your using WEP, you don't want your signal covering 3 blocks, because it would be an invitation for people to join your network.)
3) Battery life: Whether Google plans to release a phone network (OHA) or a computer network, both laptops and cell phones run on batteries.
4) While High-Powered solutions are great if you are an isolated client, lots of interference and wireless noise is created when you have many high-powered clients in too close an area.